[alt-photo] Re: Michael Wesely's work (was reciprocity failure)

[Don Bryant]

Since there seems to be a scent of digital work in flux, I'll posit that his
exposures are much shorter and does several over an extended period of time
and then does some exposure stacking in Photoshop to blend the images. My
theory anyway.

-----Original Message-----
From: alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org
[mailto:alt-photo-process-list-bounces at lists.altphotolist.org] On Behalf Of
Charles Ryberg
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2012 8:17 PM
To: The alternative photographic processes mailing list
Subject: [alt-photo] Re: Michael Wesely's work (was reciprocity failure)

My three camera test suggestion is based on my assumption that as a straight

pinhole camera the many month exposure just won't work.  Rather than wait 
many months to find out, I suggest setting up three identical cameras.  If 
the exposure does not work, then the first camera, developed in one week, 
will prove it and you can quit the test soon.  If, however, the first camera

gives an underexposed negative (is this possible?) then the test is worth 
continuing with cameras two and three--so you haven't wasted a week.

This would also help if you decided to use a filter--in a week you would 
know if your filter was way too week.

My cover-all-bases lazy approach.    Charles    Portland Oregon 

_______________________________________________
Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo